FYI, I backported STORM-1484 and STORM-1478 to 1.x-branch which makes diverge, since it doesn't touch clojure files and they are small fixes.
After this, we can still backport pull requests via "git merge". There're some pull requests left for bug fixes which should be backported to 1.x-branch (even 0.10.x-branch) In order to ease works, we may want to sync between master and 1.x for some moments. - Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR) 2016년 1월 21일 (목) 오전 6:49, Jungtaek Lim <[email protected]>님이 작성: > Never mind. Taylor seems to delete docs directory to 1.x-branch already. I > didn't indicate that. > I'll check again that 'git merge' is no longer complaining. > > 2016년 1월 21일 (목) 오전 6:01, Jungtaek Lim <[email protected]>님이 작성: > >> Bobby, >> >> I just want to ease effort of merging pull requests since there're many >> pull requests left for 0.x / 1.x. >> Current diversity between master and 1.x-branch is just STORM-1468 >> <http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-1468> (remove docs from >> source branch). >> So if we have in mind to make 1.x stable by handling current pull >> requests / issues for 0.x / 1.x first before port, diversity issue can be >> narrowed to "Can we address STORM-1468 from 1.x?". >> If we think it can be, we can merge pull requests to master, and just >> sync 1.x branch to same to master continuously until first pull request of >> porting should merge to master. >> >> to All : What do you think? >> >> Thanks, >> Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR) >> >> 2016년 1월 20일 (수) 오전 12:27, Bobby Evans <[email protected]>님이 >> 작성: >> >>> The 1.x branch is supposed to be for stabilizing a 1.x release, while >>> master (2.x) diverges with the JStorm merger. I thought it would be best >>> to keep 1.x open temporarily to back-port features, as there were several >>> that were close to going in, but didn't quite make it, and because there >>> was at least one blocker waiting for a pull request, which is now up >>> (STORM-1452) >>> >>> Now that the long weekend in the US is over I think it is time to start >>> getting serious about stabilizing a 1.x release. There are a number of >>> pull request up for bug fixes which I hope to merge in today/tomorrow, and >>> I know that several different people are already working on the JStorm >>> merger. So I would expect to see the first pull requests for JStorm go up >>> today/tomorrw. As more of that happens porting of features will become >>> more and more difficult. But I am not a stickler, if someone thinks a >>> feature is critically important for a 1.x release and they want to merge it >>> in, go ahead, but I would prefer to only see bug fixes go into the >>> 1.x-branch until we have a good release candidate. >>> >>> - Bobby >>> >>> On Sunday, January 17, 2016 8:09 PM, Jungtaek Lim <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> Note for reader: This may be only related to committer/PMCs. >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> We recently changed our master to 2.0.0-SNAPSHOT and make 1.x-branch. >>> Everything except "removing docs" is same between master and 1.x-branch >>> but >>> now it is diverged. >>> New PR which is based on commit after "removing docs" can't be "merged" >>> to >>> 1.x-branch via "git merge" cause it also merges excluded commits. >>> (For example, https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/1024) >>> >>> I'm curious which is convenient way maintaining 1.x-branch or 2.x-branch. >>> If we decide to maintain 1.x-branch, it could be a pain if we need to >>> merge >>> many pull requests for 0.x / 1.x after diverged. >>> What do you think? >>> >>> For now I'm waiting for decision before backporting STORM-1482 >>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-1482> to 1.x-branch. It's >>> already pushed to master, but I can't decide how to backport it to >>> 1.x-branch. Cherry-picking would what we want? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR) >>> >>> >>> >> >>
